“When we speak, the Zoo trembles. That is what happens when a cattle rearing terrorist and pedophile is your ruler. Message to every #Hardcore Biafran, if you find anybody in your village asking after Radio Biafra, kill the Baboon AwusaFoolani or Yorobberbast*ard. Let them keep searching as we keep tweeting for Biafra. Lunatics.”
The above excerpt was posted by Nnamdi Kanu, the London based director of the radio station, Radio Biafra, and a leading member of a movement agitating for Self-Determination from Nigeria to form the sovereign State of Biafra.
While doing some background on Kanu and reading his social media posts, I came across scores and scores of his hate filled rhetoric online, which legitimizes violence. I experienced three emotions. The first was of a mischievous amusement because his head looked like a watermelon. I imagined that his nickname would be Mr Bobblehead. The second was an anxious curiosity I felt about his home environment as a child. I wondered what kind of toxic setting he grew up in that shaped this misguided young man into the hate filled reprobate making the posts I read. The third was a deep compassion I felt for him.
I felt sad to see another, amongst us, whose heart was so condemned, it perished in the deep, dark, lonely dungeon of such bigotry and loathing.
I wanted to write on some of the issues that had been raised by Mr Watermelon-Head (if I may call Kanu that since it seems so fitting) in his quest to actualize Biafra, however there were a plethora of understanding and loving the South East and the people of the South East the way I do, I feel a responsibility to dissect the matters thoroughly.
Considering the fact that the basis of Mr. Watermelon-Head’s campaign is hinged on a quest for Self-determination for Biafra, I will first examine the legal ramifications and possibility of a declaration of political autonomy from Nigeria on the backdrop of the United Nations Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples. It is not the first time the issue of Self-Determination from Nigeria has come up. In the past, groups have attempted to make use of Art 1(2) of the United Nations Charter as well as other International Covenants to assert the third generation right for political autonomy, however, the position of international legal principles and set precedents established in regards to
self-determination is not as simple and straightforward as one would assume.
As a starting point, it must be established that the right to self-determination is a group right, but one of its main problems lies with its beneficiaries; who are the people to whom the rights ascribe? Due to the fact that the right is only exerciseable by ‘peoples’, the law has to be satisfied that those who seek it meet the threshold of ‘peoples’ under international set principles.
The meaning to be attributed to the concept of ‘peoples’ for the rights of people in international law in this regard includes, groups who enjoy a common historical tradition, racial or ethnic identity, cultural homogeneity, linguistic unity, religious or ideological affinity, territorial connection or common economic life. The group as a whole must have the will to be identified as a people or the consciousness of being a people. In view of this definition, it is presumed that Mr. Watermelon-Head’s definition of the Biafran people satisfies the definition of ‘peoples’ for the purpose of securing their indigenous rights under the United Nations Convention.
While unilateral secession is not specifically prohibited, it is clear that international law does not specifically grant component parts of sovereign states the legal right to secede unilaterally from their parent state. Self-determination is clearly acceptable for divesting States of colonial powers but the problems arise when groups not in solo occupation of a given defined State territory choose to exercise self-determination.
So, based on the set precedence of the International legal provision that Mr. Watermelon-Head probably would need to seek to rely on, would such a quest for political autonomy of Biafra from Nigeria succeed under the United Nations Charter? Given the fact that it would be difficult to argue that Biafra meets the threshold of a colonial people or an oppressed people or that they have been denied meaningful access to government to pursue their political, economic, cultural and social development, any quest he may have for self-determination under the United Nations Charter would be unlikely to succeed. International law would expect any such agitation for self-determination to be sought within the framework of Nigeria.
Mr. Watermelon-Head has got the law, both international and internal, twisted! The second limb of the preamble to the Constitution makes provision aimed at engendering peaceful coexistence and unity of Nigeria. Perhaps, Mr. Watermelon-Head should be advised to concentrate his efforts on engaging the leadership of Nigeria for… better leadership rather than go on this ‘Frolic of his own!”It is likely that the grievances Mr. Watermelon-Head has is hinged on the failure of past political leaders to promote good governance and welfare of all persons on the principles of Freedom, Equality, and Justice that has heightened his agitation for the Biafran State, which threatens the peace of the Nation.
Musawa wrote from Kaduna
